Comments by praireylark

Page 1 of 1

Posted on September 16 at 10:20 a.m.

I totally agree. Tudor should most definitely be fired. We don't need that kind of testosterone and adrenaline fueled violence by the police in our town. If he can't control himself, why is he still here?

Yes, this is about gun laws. He did kill with a knife and injure with his car and could have used a variety of other weapons, but with automatic guns, he could kill three innocent people in six minutes and wounded maybe ten? The thing is, maybe deranged killers could use other weapons, but they always use guns, usually automatic assault weapons designed for the killing of people. It is a good thing to be responsible and regulate dangerous machines. We renew our car's registration each year, we have a license, we take tests on car laws and safe driving, our eyes our checked and our capability. Why don't we do at least that for guns? Because some people like to hold on to a past that never existed? Because some people want their dangerous toys without strict responsible regulation. Fear of the NRA? Not one more should die because some like to get hysterical and paranoid over guns. We want our town and our children safe and it shouldn't matter if those who own guns have to be a little inconvenienced. Be an adult, be responsible, please.

One thing that is frightening to me is that here, in this discussion, the posters Loon and SBLifer sound much like Elliott Rogers. Should we be afraid they will decide to go on a rampage and rid the world of "libtards" or pay everyone back because they don't believe their conspiracy theories? There is so much mental illness in the world and in today's violent society, and with easy access to guns, it is frightening.

It seems to me there needs to be some "management" of the free speech plaza. Students are probably not allowed to stand out there stark naked, or act out a rape, or have placards with pornographic images. It sounds like these graphic and disturbing photos fall into those categories. Do they have a right to proselytize their ideas, of course, but there is a limit to what should be allowed. As to the professor, this was an error of judgement on her part as these Westboro Baptist imitators are jumping with glee at the kerfuffle that has resulted. Was their "assault"? I sure didn't see any. Of course, their disgusting placard was ruined, but they are quite overjoyed at the whole thing. The professor needs to be wiser. Horrific, overtly sexual, shocking images need to be addressed by a committee and rules need to be made.

It is interesting to observe the hostile and antagonistic attitude towards rescue organizations held by the animal control officer above. Is this typical? Although I am not involved in the rescue movement, I have always had great respect for those who attempt to save the lives and lessen the suffering of unwanted animals. Before the SPCA and the legal protections of animals and children, cruelty was casual and without consequence. If I follow this animal control officer's logic, rescues are dangerous because they allow animals with "behavioral, physical and emotional problems" to survive and, perhaps, become part of a family. And it would be better to destroy the animals based on the animal control officer's opinion they are not worthy of life. Explains a lot.

Wow, corruption really does work and the downside is evident when you drive by this house. It is ugly, charmless, inappropriate for the neighborhood, and I am embarrassed for out of towners to see what can still get by in allegedly beautiful Santa Barbara. Would this look good in the funk zone? Yes, probably, depending on what was around it, but the total disregard for the setting is disgraceful. When the jacarandas bloom, this was one of the prettiest streets. What were they thinking? Long after industrial chic has faded into fad history, the neighborhood will be stuck looking at this ugly, metal box. I notice the designers have their sign in front. Okay, if they want to take credit for it, but everyone I have talked with hates it. If they want to be anti-Santa Barbara and disturbing they should take it to the funk zone. And shame on those who sold out the neighborhood.

And the punishment for an infraction of the leash law is death? And if a child is caught shoplifting, the shopowner can beat him? No, it is not the privilege of just anyone to take the law into their own hands and administer punishment, obviously.

Show me where it says other individuals on public lands near recreation areas are allowed to enforce leash laws with deadly force.

And what is the greater crime, being off leash or shooting to kill just because you can? So disgusting.

Upon thinking about it, it seems that we are being failed by our law enforcement personnel. Who is supposed to protect Santa Barbara citizens and their pets from nutcases with guns and bad attitudes? Why was the shooter just sent on his way after he admitted killing the dog? Aren't we supposed to be able to enjoy ourselves on our trails, in our county, while being protected? Is the Forest Service responsible or some other police?

So, losolivoslocal, if I understand you correctly, it is legal and okay to shoot and kill someone's pet if it barks at you? Because after all, you feel threatened? That is so ridiculous, I cannot believe they just let this guy walk away. So I guess it is open season on pets? The ranger was negligent as well.

This is ridiculous. These "hunters" obviously are irresponsible hotheads and should be prosecuted for negligence or perhaps sued? I wonder what legal action could be taken as they surely should be held accountable.